... and in the end, the "Smug neo-fascist" Tories did relatively quite well and the "struggling for their lives" zombie Labour received a bit of a dead-cat Corbyn bounce, hell, even the lying-liar Lib Dems took a seat or two - you might remember each had just one seat after #GE2015, so any gains at all looked remarkable!

However the SNP, even after losing 21, took more seats than all the rest put together -

Not that you'll have heard that from the CCM likes of the BBC etc.

The inevitable loses of the SNP (the only way is down really from 95%) were in part due to some very effective collaboration between the Unionist parties on tactical voting.

It’s unaccountable and it’s once again out of control. Rampaging across Scotland’s political landscape, this media beast is roaring on behalf of its Union masters and the noise is deafening.

I refer of course to BBC Scotland. The institution has gone into hyper mode as it seeks to promote the cult of Ruth and kill off Indyref2.

It’s been non-stop since last Thursday when Ruth Davidson won an historic victory in the general election in Scotland. Ruth’s Scottish Conservative party won a massive thirteen seats to the SNP’s paltry thirty five. Her win means a second independence referendum is dead in the water. I know because I heard David Mundell say so on BBC News at Ten.
...

It’s not a coup but it’s as close as you can get to it without removing the party of government. If Nicola Sturgeon was to bow to this media assisted pressure then why bother with elections at all? Just hand power to the loudest shouter. How long til we regress to the point where we settle differences with a battle?

This is where we have got to in Scotland. Careerist reporters reading pre-prepared scripts written by Unionist politicians. The ‘news’ narrative has already been determined. The ‘bad’ guys are the SNP.

In this new political era it isn’t votes that win elections, it’s apparently momentum. It isn’t voters who bestow mandates, it’s reporters. The TV has replaced the ballot box. The Scottish Government sits at Pacific Quay.

Lost amid the clamour of ‘Advice for the SNP’ articles – plus, of course, carnage in London, the Brexit fiasco and chaos at the heart of the UK system – one striking event since the General Election has gone almost unremarked upon: the erosion of Scottish democracy.

Make no mistake, the narrative which has been established by the Unionist parties – trialed the very moment polls showed losses for the SNP – sets a dangerous precedent, marking a potentially grave turning-point in Scottish history.
...

The legal situation, as we can see, is clear and watertight. At each step the SNP have been open about their intentions, have followed democratic procedures, and have obeyed the wishes of the Scottish electorate. The Unionist parties then, in denying the SNP’s mandate, are engaging in a coup.
...

Scottish democracy, in effect, has just been rewritten without any of us being consulted, or even noticing.

By the Unionist parties’ definition, as James Kelly of Scot Goes Pop has pointed out, the Tories had no right to implement their manifesto after 2015, on 37% of the vote, nor did Labour between 2005 and 2010, on 35%.

Do we now see the absurdity of their argument?
...

It might be easy to write these machinations off as political spin (which they are) were the repercussions not so dire. Short of an impossibly high bar – yet another majority in Holyrood? repeating the 2015 total of Westminster seats? plus an immense share of the popular vote? – Scots are now being told there is simply no way to democratically bring about a second independence referendum.
...

Time and the democratic will move on. Whether Unionists like it or not, Scots have voted to have another say on the independence question. Opinion polls (or ones without very leading questions) bear this out.

The Scottish Parliament has decreed that a referendum will be held when the Brexit settlement is clear. That is eminently sensible, given how disastrous Brexit is set to be. Scots may or may not vote No again, may or may not remain in the United Kingdom, but if this referendum does not take place, under pressure from Unionists, then not only will independence be nullified but so too will Holyrood as a forum for Scottish popular will. A ‘quiet victory’ indeed.

We must hold the line.

One of the main questions of #Indyref in 2014 was about the economy and here is the latest in Phantom Power's excellent series "Journey to Yes" from Prof. Richard Murphy -

I know you might have been told that "Now is NOT the time" or that #ScotRef is "dead in the water" etc. but the Scots just aren't listening - NOT to BBC Scotland anyway!
Here's 20-25,000 of them just before the election - the biggest pro-independence rally ever in Glasgow.

Nothing much has changed.

#ScotRef will still take place late 2018 or early 2019 once the cluserfuck of #Brexit becomes more apparent to everyone.

This faux nationalism is spitting in the face to the very history of Scotland. i am all in favour of a country wanting independence. This has nothing to do with wanting independence, the real EU has emerged from the friendly facade that they wore, now the plan is explicitly on the table to overwhelm and replace Europe with third world immigrants who will become the new permanent slave class.

Therefore having seen the true face of these psychopathic genocidal bastards the fact that there are cheerleaders for Scotland to stay with the EU. Only underlines the fact that they don't give a flying shit about nationality and identity only a concern that some of this genocidal madness may be curbed. To that I say though don't worry, don't panic, the UK government will continue to shit on the people of these isles, so this politically correct throat slitting will continue anyway.

This faux nationalism is spitting in the face to the very history of Scotland. i am all in favour of a country wanting independence. This has nothing to do with wanting independence, the real EU has emerged from the friendly facade that they wore, now the plan is explicitly on the table to overwhelm and replace Europe with third world immigrants who will become the new permanent slave class.

Therefore having seen the true face of these psychopathic genocidal bastards the fact that there are cheerleaders for Scotland to stay with the EU. Only underlines the fact that they don't give a flying shit about nationality and identity only a concern that some of this genocidal madness may be curbed. To that I say though don't worry, don't panic, the UK government will continue to shit on the people of these isles, so this politically correct throat slitting will continue anyway.

I'm not exactly sure what your point is here but my position is that I want Scotland to win independence first because there's absolutely no chance of fighting successfully against any major issues that affect me while Westminster is running the show. Once we get control of our own affairs, we can start addressing what needs to be done next. Independence is not a cure-all or a guaranteed solution but it's a chance to find some answers. That chance most certainly does not exist with the status quo.

I have always seen the choice between British unionism and Scottish independence as equivalent to a choice between staying aboard the Titanic (because, for one thing, you've booked your table for dinner) or grabbing a packet of biscuits and clambering onto a lifeboat. In an ideal world, I wouldn't choose to cross the Atlantic in a lifeboat but I recognise that there can be times when that's by far the best option on offer. Similarly, I'd gladly take my chances in an independent Scotland rather than wait for the official emergence of the British Police State.

If that makes me a faux nationalist, so be it. I'm not particularly fond of rowing either._________________My real name is Gerry.

There's two Labour parties. Blair's old guard NWO - and Corbyn's young guard.

I'm not so sure about that, Fintan. If anything, I think the SNP hasn't attacked Labour enough. Whether Corbyn's a nice guy or not, the bottom line as far as the SNP should be concerned is that he's a British unionist. It matters not whether a British unionist is a rabid, right-wing Tory, a rigid, left-wing socialist or an invertebrate Lib-Dem, it has been proved that all of them will unite to oppose the one thing that the SNP stands for - Scottish independence. As such, they are all the enemy and should be treated as such.

In a sense, there are two Scotlands (and consequently, two SNPs). The densely populated, essentially urban, Central Belt is Labour's heartland while the more rural areas to the north and south - the Highlands & Islands and the Borders - are traditionally much more conservative or liberal. Before the 1980s, the SNP had practically no chance of challenging Labour. The Nationalists' few prospects of electoral success were mostly in seats that were held by Conservatives or Liberals and where Labour candidates struggled to save their deposits. For that reason, the SNP were pejoratively referred to as the Tartan Tories as a matter of routine and there was a lot of substance in that jibe.

It wasn't until people like Jim Sillars (a man for whom I have a lot of time) successfully argued that the SNP would achieve nothing until it turned radically to the left and set its sights on Labour as its principle opponent that the SNP started on its course towards political relevance. It shouldn't stop now. Labour is no friend to the SNP and never will be.

The comparative success of the Tories at the recent General Election was exclusively in those rural areas and, in my view, reflected the perception of the Tory voters that the SNP were close enough to Corbyn's Labour to make the prospect of a Lab-SNP government distinctly possible. But that in itself wouldn't have been enough to win the seats for the Conservatives; what tipped the balance in their favour was that the leadership of the other unionist parties encouraged their supporters to lend their votes to the anti-independence candidate best placed to stop the SNP.

The other important thing about the General Election was that it was first and foremost about deciding who was to be the next Prime Minister of the UK. In that context, Scottish independence is not the dominant issue to be dealt with; even for many pro-independence voters, the primary aim was simply to stop May (or Corbyn) from taking immediate power. Other matters, including the desire for independence, were put to one side by some but only temporarily.

I regard it as a serious tactical and strategic error for the SNP to cosy up to any of the unionist parties. A pox on the lot of them, I say. I'd gladly package up Labour, the Conservatives, the Liberal-Democrats, the DUP and the UKIP together and consign them all to everlasting oblivion.
There are a great many SNP members and activists who have practically no common political ground other than the belief that Scotland ought to be an independent nation. Everything else can be disputed but that is the one, central, unshakeable principle that the SNP must never dilute. Otherwise, as we have seen, the straightforward clarity of its position either gets obscured or it slips through the cracks of the irrelevant left-right split._________________My real name is Gerry.

What I am getting at it there would not be a renewed voice for independence had the the UK voted to stay in the EU.
This idea of nationalism cannot co-exist with what the EU is orchestrating and so this is faux nationalism. Hiding behind this idea of nationalism to drive and maintain the agenda to sweep away nation's.

What I am getting at it there would not be a renewed voice for independence had the the UK voted to stay in the EU.
This idea of nationalism cannot co-exist with what the EU is orchestrating and so this is faux nationalism. Hiding behind this idea of nationalism to drive and maintain the agenda to sweep away nation's.

Okay, I can go along with that but only up to a point.

The nationalism of yesteryear is a dead letter today and from that point of view, Scottish "nationalism" is a bit of a misnomer. No nation can have absolute independence these days but there's no justification for arguing that Scotland's interests in Europe or elsewhere will be best served by parties who can govern the whole of the UK from London without ever needing to win a single Scottish seat. Whatever mechanism the pro-independence movement can exploit in order to break from London rule is worth pursuing in order to keep the matter high on the agenda.
The Brexit vote breakdown is pretty complicated and it would be a mistake to assume that it followed party lines in Scotland. I am far from the only supporter of independence who voted to leave the EU and I also know plenty of others who only voted to remain as a tactical wheeze in order to engineer further constitutional complications for the UK. I was tempted to do that myself._________________My real name is Gerry.

EVERYTHING in Scottish politics changed three years ago. Well, everything except the Labour party in Scotland’s persistent search for a leader who can last longer than a gob-stopper. On Monday it was the third anniversary of the first Scottish independence referendum.

There will be another one, and the next independence referendum will be the last Scottish independence referendum, because the independence movement is going to win it. Scotland is on a trajectory that leads only one way, and today, the 20th of September is the third anniversary of that journey. The 18th of September is the anniversary of a vote. The 19th of September is the anniversary of a hangover. The 19th of September 2014 was the day that we nursed our wounds, when we grieved for the hopes that were not to be realised immediately, we mourned for the dreams that were not about to come true.

The 20th of September, today’s anniversary, is a much more important date. The 20th of September 2014 is the day that the independence movement picked itself up, dusted itself down, and said to Scotland and to the world: “This story isn’t over. We’ve only just got started.” The 20th of September is when we realised that the dream of independence wasn’t dead, it was still very much alive and it still danced and shone and lit the path to a better country. It was the day when we made a vow of our own, a vow to hold the British establishment to account for the promises and commitments it had made during the referendum campaign, a vow to keep the flame of hope burning bright.
...

The Scottish independence referendum has been followed by a series of vindictive and power-grabbing acts on the part of a Westminster which seems determined to punish Scotland for daring to be different.

They told us that Scotland was a valued and equal member of a family of nations. The British parties competed with one another in the Smith Commission to give as little ground as possible and to strip the infamous Vow of any meaningful content. We got English Votes for English Laws, and the legal guarantees of the permanence of the Scottish Parliament turned out to be meaningless window dressing. We were promised that the only way to be certain of our membership of the EU was to vote for the UK, and then we got Brexit.
...

I HAVE shared my fears on the economic impact of Brexit on Scotland. Fears about damage to investment, to exports, to workers rights and to vital skilled EU worker immigration – creating a skills shortage while also increasing the age of our population. However, I am now beginning to wonder if the single largest victim of Brexit will be devolution and even democracy itself.

I never did understand why it bothered people that we shared a few powers across the EU to create a working single market and customs union.

In a world of global trade all economies are linked and interdependent and therefore modern independence relies on countries being willing to share some small amount of sovereignty to smooth trade and to maintain prosperity.

The UK maintained its sovereignty whilst in the EU. It just shared some of it to remove trade barriers and create a level playing field for exporters.

It is just nuts to suggest that this means your country is not truly independent. Such claims rely on thinking so outdated they make about as much sense as claiming any country without a king can’t really call itself a country (which was actually said to me recently).

Scotland doesn’t share its sovereignty with the UK, however. The UK maintains its sovereignty over us – and not the 10 per cent or so the UK shares with the EU, but 100 per cent of it. Any powers Scotland possesses through devolution do not amount to sovereignty, they are only the limited control of limited powers that are not guaranteed to continue because sovereignty still resides at Westminster (in fact, technically, at Buckingham Palace). In practical terms, any new powers Scotland gets, or any existing powers Scotland retains, are at the behest of Westminster.
...

The EU Withdrawal Bill re-activates powers that date back hundreds of years to the reign of Henry VIII. They will effectively allow Theresa May – who does not hold a majority – to govern by decree and largely remove Westminster’s ability to scrutinise her actions.

Don’t take my word for it. The Hansard Society – the highly respected global charity that works to promote democracy and strengthen parliamentary oversight – stated that “The broad scope of the delegated powers [including Henry VIII powers] within the EU [Withdrawal] Bill, the inadequate constraints placed on them, and shortcomings in the proposed parliamentary control of the delegated legislation that will be made using them, constitute a toxic mix, for Parliament and the balance of power”, that is, the balance of power between Theresa May and Parliament’s ability to hold her to account.

Make no mistake, as well as Brexit in general being an ill thought out act of economic suicide, contained within the EU Withdrawal Bill is an assault on both devolution and on Parliamentary democracy itself.

A very British administrative coup d’état is hiding behind the complexity of Brexit legislation, opposition party stupidity, mainstream media ignorance and voter apathy.

Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon expressed concern Thursday about
the Spanish government's crackdown in Catalonia, saying the right of self-
determination should be respected everywhere.

She was speaking after thousands of people took to the streets of
Barcelona on Wednesday after police detained key members of the team
organising an outlawed independence referendum for Catalonia set for
October 1st.

Imagine that, instead of agreeing terms with Alex Salmond on an
independence referendum, David Cameron had prosecuted him.

Suppose Tory MPs had called for troops to be deployed to prevent a vote,
and for Scots to be Anglicised. Scottish voters would have felt, with justice,
that they were being treated as conquered vassals and the United
Kingdom would have cracked apart.

Incredibly, Spanish conservatives are taking this line on Catalonia.
For many on the Spanish Right, hostility to separatism is the core of
their beliefs. They justify their inflexibility by pointing to the letter of the
constitution, which forbids such plebiscites, but their motive is more
atavistic than legalistic. Paradoxically, they are creating the very thing
they purport to oppose. You persuade people to stay by making clear
they are free to leave.

_________________Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.

Thanks for sharing the Perspective video, James. All good stuff.
And yet this is a country where half of the population just don't get it. To me, that invites a conclusion that it's pointless to trust people who have no trust in themselves and, worse still, mobilise to undermine, attack and intimidate anyone who does have the balls to take some responsibility for their own future. I honestly don't know how a country can prosper when so many of its citizens are determined to drag it down themselves.

Incidentally, it grinds my gears to hear so many people who should know better consistently mispronounce Holyrood. George Reid says it properly - "Wholly rood". It doesn't rhyme with Hollywood. This deliberate mispronunciation is a propaganda ploy which has been led from the start by the unionist BBC and its fellow travellers. It's been so successful that it even affects pro-independence activists such as Alan Bissett and numerous SNP politicians!

Nevertheless, it's still Holy Rood and most definitely NOT Holly Rood._________________My real name is Gerry.

I haven't posted anything in a while as, apart from being slightly distracted by what's going on in Catalunya, there isn't really a lot going on in Scotland at the moment, except for the "day jobs" being done!

The Scottish Government are sitting back calmly (sipping on some fine 12 year old single malts etc.) and watching and waiting as the UK Government burns down in flames before their very eyes.

As Sun Tzu said in the "Art of War" - "Never interrupt your enemy when he's making mistakes" Indeed, but the Scottish Government will need to gauge the moment of when to strike and call the "Second Independence Referendum".

One thing that has happened though is the increasing nervousness of the MSM, the CCM, the Corporate Controlled Media and the fact that the success of the Alternative internet-based Media is seriously starting to destroy their crediblity. Especially the BBC!

But the BBC man seems a little confused.
...
But let’s put all that to one side for a moment. Because Robinson’s idea of “engaging” with those who don’t trust the BBC is to, in the next breath, dismiss them as sinister and paranoid conspiracy nutters trying to bully and discredit honest journalists.
...
Websites can only convince people to disbelieve the news when they can prove, on a regular basis, that it’s not telling the truth. Nobody listens to a ranting loony with no evidence. If we’d just claimed Nick Robinson lied about Alex Salmond not giving him an answer, the post wouldn’t have been read hundreds of thousands of times. It was because we incontrovertibly SHOWED them him doing it that it made people angry.
...
It’s precisely this sort of commitment to hard journalistic evidence that, in Robinson’s own words, gives readers “the tools to separate what is true and what is important from the torrent of half-facts and opinion“. We retain trust where the BBC has lost it because we don’t lie to people, and unlike them we link to the sources for all our claims.
...

Nor do we “live in a social media bubble”. Would that we did. We live in a world where we’re assailed by a torrent of one-sided propaganda from our opponents every single day whenever we turn on the TV or the radio or walk into a newsagents, against which we’ve learned we can’t rely on the “impartial” national broadcaster to give us a voice.
...

However the amount of shrieking and tearing out of hair by the CCM has reached critical level with the news that Alex Salmond, former MP and former First Minister of Scotland (and now un-shackled! ) is to have his own TV show on, God forbid that Satan, RT - Russia Today, produced by his own procuction company Slàinte Media and directed by also former MP (and former Bollywood actress) Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh.

The irony is that BBC Scotland spent so much time, effort and not unconsiderable amount of tax payers' money trying to unseat them with a specifically targeted campaign and now that the "beast" is back to bite them on the bum big time, they have no one to blame but themselves!

The unionists are shitting themselves and there is now an all out effort to try and destroy it before it even starts and an agenda to try and make it impossilbe for anyone to "morally" appear on the show.

Check out this hatchet job of an interview by the normally excellent Jon Snow of Channel 4 -

"THE scene: a deserted TV studio. Two empty leather chairs wait invitingly on a cold concrete set. Enter stage left a portly figure in a brown three-piece suit. His lilac face is buttery with make-up, red-rimmed eyes smarting under the lights. It looks as if someone has been using Mr Toad to test cosmetics. He waves his hammy mitts aloft and looms into the lens with a familiar, half-crazed chuckle: “Hello, and welcome to the Alex Salmond Show!”
...

With the complete lack of self-awareness which is the hallmark of the true British Nationalist fanatic, Tom Gordon demonstrates why it is not only right, but essential that Alex Salmond does this TV programme. The arguments about whether it is appropriate to use RT are totally irrelevant. It's all there is. No broadcaster beholden to the British state is going to allow Scotland's Yes movement the means to communicate its message directly to the people of Scotland. The real issue here; the issue that's being obscured by the bitter, vituperative hysteria of British 'journalists' like Tom Gordon, is the fact that a lawful, peaceful, democratic movement supported by around half the people of Scotland is denied fair access to the media.

The pertinent question is, not why Salmond is doing his show on a Russian-owned TV channel, but why he is prevented from doing it on any channel controlled by the British establishment.

Of course, Tom Gordon and his ilk would never even think to ask such a question. Which is why, when referring to their profession, the term 'journalist' must be placed in quotes. Because the question is the most fundamental tool of the genuine professional journalist. Anyone who assiduously avoids questions which might prove awkward for established power is not practising journalism. They are merely propagandising on behalf of established power. They are protecting established power. And this is true whether they are in the pay of RT or the BBC or the Sunday Herald.

Established power must be challenged in a democracy. There can be no functioning democracy where there is no means, or capacity, or will, to challenge established power.

Alex Salmond has the will to challenge the British state. He also has the capacity. Which is precisely why the British establishment denies him the means. And why British Nationalists are roused to such a frenzy of fearful fury when he acquires the means.

Complaints that Salmond may be self-regarding and self-important and self-aggrandising miss the point about the person every bit as much as the shrill denunciations of RT miss the point about the means. It is precisely Salmond's nature that makes him willing and able to confront the might of the British state's propaganda machine.

Tom Gordon's is the voice of the British state. The voice of the ruling elites. He speaks for the structures of power, privilege and patronage which define the British state. That cannot be the only voice we are permitted to hear. For the sake of democracy, there must be an alternative. How else might people even become aware that they have a choice? Arguably, no individual is better placed to be that alternative voice. Certainly, no British broadcaster is going to facilitate that voice being heard.

A defiant Carles Puigdemont says he’s confident the Catalan independence movement will prevail as he joins Alex Salmond, an outspoken proponent of Scottish departure from the UK, on Salmond’s new show set to premiere on RT.

Puigdemont, the first guest to appear on RT’s ‘Alex Salmond Show’, said it was a very tragic yet emotional day on October 1, when Catalans overwhelmingly supported the ‘yes’ campaign to secede from Spain.
...